I am building up url for different entity in Dynamics 365 crm. I found this for crm 2011 but I want more elaborate solution than that.
Observed URL:
For Quote Entity: https:**[instance url]**.com/main.aspx?etc=1084&extraqs=&histKey=254156564&id=%7b[**GUID**]%7d&newWindow=true&pagetype=entityrecord&sitemappath=SFA%7cCollateral%7cnav_quotes#765575448
For Order Entity: https:**[instance url]**.com/main.aspx?etc=1088&extraqs=&histKey=653905533&id=%7b[**GUID**]%7d&newWindow=true&pagetype=entityrecord&sitemappath=SFA%7cCollateral%7cnav_orders#817364929
I created other url for other entities and observed the query parameter value of the url as like below:
1. etc is constant for different entity. eg. for quote(1084) and order(1088)
2. extraqs is empty.
3. histKey is variable for an entity. It is appearing in different value for a same entity record.
4. id is the unique identifier of a record (i have no question about this)
5. sitemappath is different for different entity.
Now I want to know about -
1. what is etc and why it remains same for a entity always?
2. what is histKey(why it gives random value every time) and sitemappath?
We are using these in our Dynamics 365 CRM application without issues. Read more
Simple record form using etc (entity type code):
https://myorg.crm.dynamics.com/main.aspx?etc=1&id=%7b[GUID]%7d&pagetype=entityrecord
Same record using etn (entity type name):
https://myorg.crm.dynamics.com/main.aspx?etn=account&id=%7b[GUID]%7d&pagetype=entityrecord
Same record in UCI:
https://myorg.crm.dynamics.com/apps/appname/main.aspx?etc=1&id=%7b[GUID]%7d&pagetype=entityrecord
Particular form using formid:
https://myorg.crm.dynamics.com/main.aspx?etc=1&id=%7b[GUID]%7d&pagetype=entityrecord&extraqs=formid%3d[formGUID]
sitemap can be ignored as the pagetype param will render the top navigation bar & histkey can also be ignored as its for internal platform/browser usage for previous/forward navigation. extraqs is any extra query string param you want to pass that pre-populate the form attribute.
https://myorg.crm.dynamics.com/main.aspx?etc=1&id=%7b[GUID]%7d&pagetype=entityrecord&extraqs=fullname%3DNew%20Contact
Documentation says:
Do not use the etc (entity type code) parameter that contains an integer code for the entity. This integer code varies for custom entities in different organizations
But if you are not creating a custom entity directly in any non-development environment, only the solution is being used to port the customizations across different environment then that should not be an issue.
To open a Particular Record for Account Entity, Where etn is Entity Schema name.
http://myorg.crm.dynamics.com/main.aspx?etn=account&pagetype=entityrecord&id=%7B91330924-802A-4B0D-A900-34FD9D790829%7D
For Example you have a Custom Entity let's call it Account Plan and your entity schema name is new_accountplan, so your url will be something like below
http://myorg.crm.dynamics.com/main.aspx?etn=new_accountplan&pagetype=entityrecord&id=%7B81440924-802A-4B0D-A900-34FD9D790829%7D
Similar way to open a particular Form for user to fill information
https://myorg.crm.dynamics.com/main.aspx?etc=1&id=%7b[GUID]%7d&pagetype=entityrecord&extraqs=formid%3d[formGUID]
You can use Power Pane Chrome addon which is a helper tool , help you to show entities urls
Related
I have to create and remove attributes based on an api response in Objective C.
For example, Now my api response contains fields "facebook", "whatsapp" and "viber". But in future the reponse can add "youtube". Based on this response, I have to remove all the attributes and values of an entity "Social", and create Four attributes now and set values.
How to do that programmatically? Because the default *.xcdatamodeld file cant help me here, right?
Note: My project is in objective C.
The data model is mutable when the app starts-- you can completely build the model in code, and not use the model editor, for example. But as soon as you load a persistent store file, you must treat the model as fixed. Any changes after loading a persistent store will cause crashes. That means any changes would have to happen before calling either loadPersistentStores(completionHandler:) or addPersistentStore(with:completionHandler:).
Alexander's suggestion of optional attributes is a good one. If you need the model to be more dynamic, you would need to create a new related entity which would store the service name plus whatever information you need to save about the service. If you did this, your Social entity would have a to-many relationship to a new entity called something like Service. Service would have a string property called name that would have values like twitter, facebook, youtube, etc. It would also have whatever other attributes you need to save about the service.
You can create all 4 fields in advance and just make them optional and fill them depending on the server response. But you cannot add new attributes in runtime. Your *.xcdatamodeld file compiles into *.momd and it contains all the data to create tables in the DB since Core Data by default works with SQLite under the hood and it's a relational database management system.
To make attributes optional you should check that.
And then newly created objects contain nil as default values of object properties. So, in your case your "youtube" property of Social object will be just nil.
I'm investigating using Breeze for client side caching and querying. Unfortunately the existing web service returns (JSON) objects that for a given type may have variable number and type of fields. They will all have a unique id and a few base fields, but for example a Person may have name, age and address say, and another Person may have name, birthdate and favoriteColor.
What each Person has is described by metadata sent embedded into each object (so each Person also has a metadata field).
Querying is obviously problematic here but assume for now that we will not be querying on any field that is not on all items of a given type.
We are using AngularJS too, in case that is relevant.
My question is, how would one handle this situation using Breeze? Would we be better off just using a simple object cache and "querying" simply by iterating over the cache with a predicate function?
Perhaps you should take a look on Jhon Papa's pluralsight video lecture for querying using client cache on pluralsight , which is a complete demonstration of breeze and angularJs. Also you can refer this
I'm trying to update a backbone model, the server side is asp.net mvc 4. I'm getting:
"System.ArgumentException: An item with the same key has already been added" exception.
The reason is because backbone is sending Id and id to the server as properties, and the JsonValueProvider tries to add this to a dictionary.
Here is my model:
var Task = Backbone.Model.extend({
url: "/tasks/task",
idAttribute: "Id"
});
This is send to the server via Put request:
{"Id":294912,"Task":"test","DueDate":"2012-03-24T02:00:00.000Z", "id":294912}
Is there a way to prevent backbone in sending the "id" property?
The problem here is because the conventions in C# is not the same as in JavaScript. In C# classes have properties that starts with capital letters (Pascal Case) and it's the norm in JavaScript to start your properties in lower case (Camel Case).
Thus when serializing view models the default behavior of the JSON.NET serializer is to serialize the object exactly with the same capitalization of properties. I could rename the properties on the view model to be camel case, but it would be as "weird" as to have properties with pascal case in your JavaScript objects.
So instead to force Backbone into a non convention way, I've change the serialization of the objects to convert the Pascal case properties into Camel case properties by leveraging JSON.NET's Contract Resolver functionality.
var settings = new JsonSerializerSettings();
settings.ContractResolver = new CamelCasePropertyNamesContractResolver();
JsonSerializer serializer = JsonSerializer.Create(settings);
JsonConvert.SerializeObject(object, Formatting.None, settings);
Now this creates consistency on the client side with my code and with all the cool libraries out there.
Sounds to me like the issue is in your server-side code, not with the call from Backbone. A PUT is an edit operation on the server, so you're updating an existing entity. You need the ID property to identify the model on the server and update the properties that have changed.
If ASP.NET MVC is complaining that the model already exists in the database, you are trying to do an INSERT instead of an UPDATE. We'd need to see the controller and data access code to see where things are going awry.
UPDATE: What happens if you leave off the idAttribute property? From the Backbone documentation:
A special property of models, the id is an arbitrary string (integer id or UUID).
If you set the id in the attributes hash, it will be copied onto the model as a
direct property.
The id attribute should be sent by default; it looks like you're forcing it to be included a second time.
Under idAttribute in the docs:
A model's unique identifier is stored under the id attribute. If you're directly communicating
with a backend (CouchDB, MongoDB) that uses a different unique key, you may set a Model's
idAttribute to transparently map from that key to id.
ASP.NET MVC's model binding should be able to cope with id vs. Id.
UPDATE: Found a good blog post that describes using a view model to aid in serializing your C# objects into the format Backbone expects. This seems like a reasonable, if slightly annoying, solution.
This happens in ASP.NET MVC 2, .NET 4 (EF 4). My Address entity has a reference to the Post reference. Zip is the primary key of the Post entity. Another property in Post entity is CityName. In my views I allow users to change the CityName for the address which automatically (via jquery) loads up the corresponding Zip and stores it inside a hidden field.
When posted, both values are posted fine and binded to the Address's Post reference. But UpdateModel() fails to update them. It says that the Zip is part of the entity's Entity Key and cannot be changed.
I would gladly load up the Post entity by the new Zip and manually assign it to the existing Address but for all other properties I stall want to rely on UpdateModel().
How can I achieve that? One would think that in EF4 stuff like this has been resolved..
By default the entity framework generated classes put restrictions on changing primary key values. This is good. You shouldn't change a PK for any reason at all. Changing PKs outside of add scenarios has pretty huge ramifications for state tracking and the general health of your system.
To solve this problem you want to tell UpdateModel not to update your primary keys using the exclude parameter.
I'm working on my first ASP.NET MVC (beta for version 3) application (using EF4) and I'm struggling a bit with some of the conventions around saving a new record and updating an existing one. I am using the standard route mapping.
When the user goes to the page /session/Evaluate they can enter a new record and save it. I have an action defined like this:
[ActionName("Evaluate")]
[AcceptVerbs(HttpVerbs.Post)]
public ActionResult EvaluateSave(EvaluteSessionViewModel evaluatedSession)
{
}
When they save I grab an entity off the view model and attach it to my context and save. So far, so good. Now I want the user to be able to edit this record via the url /session/Evaluate/1 where '1' is the record ID.
Edit: I have my EF entity attached as a property to the View Model.
If I add an overloaded method, like this (so I can retrieve the '1' portion automatically).
[ActionName("Evaluate")]
[AcceptVerbs(HttpVerbs.Post)]
public ActionResult EvaluateSave(ID, EvaluteSessionViewModel evaluatedSession)
{
}
I get an "The current request for action 'Evaluate' on controller type 'SessionsController' is ambiguous between the following action" error. I'm not sure why they're ambiguous since they look unique to me.
I decided that I was just going to skip over this issue for now and see if I could get it to update an existing record, so I commented out the EvaluateSave that didn't have the ID parameter.
What I'd like to do is this:
// Load the original entity from EF
// Rebind the postback so that the values posted update the entity
// Save the result
Since the entity is populated as the parameter (evaluatedSession) the rebinding is happening too soon. But as I look at the approach I'd like to take I realized that it opens my code up to hacking (since a user could add in fields into the posted back page and these could override the values I set in the entity).
So it seems I'm left with having to manually check each field to see if it has changed and if it has, update it. Something like this:
if (evaluatedSession.MyEntity.myField <> savedSession.myField)
savedSession.myField = evaluatedSession.MyEntity.myField;
Or, save a copy of the entity and make sure none of the non-user editable ones have changed. Yuck.
So two questions:
First: how do I disambiguate the overloaded methods?
Second: is there a better way of handling updating a previously saved record?
Edit: I guess I could use something like Automapper...
Edit 9/22/2010 - OK, it looks like this is supposed to work with a combination of two items: you can control what fields bind (and specifically exclude some of them) via the [Bind(Exclude="field1,field2")] attribute either on the class level or as part of the method doing the saving, ex.
public ActionResult EvaluateSave([Bind(Exclude="field1")] EvaluateSessionViewModel evaluatedSession)
From the EF side of things you are supposed to be able to use the ApplyCurrentValues() method from the context, ex.
context.ApplyCurrentValues(savedEval.EntityKey.EntitySetName, evaluatedSession);
Of course, that doesn't appear to work for me. I keep getting "An object with a key that matches the key of the supplied object could not be found in the ObjectStateManager. Verify that the key values of the supplied object match the key values of the object to which changes must be applied.".
I tried attaching the original entity that I had just loaded, just in case it wasn't attached to the context for some reason (before ApplyCurrentValues):
context.AttachTo(savedEval.EntityKey.EntitySetName, savedEval);
It still fails. I'm guessing it has something to do with the type of EF entity object MVC creates (perhaps it's not filled in enough for EF4 to do anything with it?). I had hoped to enable .NET framework stepping to walk through it to see what it was attempting to do, but it appears EF4 isn't part of the deal. I looked at it with Reflector but it's a little hard for me to visualize what is happening.
Well, the way it works is you can only have one method name per httpverb. So the easiest way is to create a new action name. Something like "Create" for new records and "Edit" for existing records.
You can use the AntiForgeryToken ( http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dd492767.aspx ) to validate the data. It doesn't stop all attempts at hacking but it's an added benefit.
Additional
The reason you can only have one action name per httpverb is because the model binders only attempt to model bind and really aren't type specific. If you had two methods with the same action name and two different types of parameters it can't just try and find the best match because your intent might be clearly one thing while the program only sees some sort of best match. For instance, your might have a parameter Id and a model that contains a property Id and it might not know which one you intend to use.